You are on page 1of 20

LEGAL SEPARATION; DEFENSES evidence for legal separation, he may do so and this

does not imply consent. BUT he should not make


Art 56 FC. The petition for legal separation shall be denied on any opportunities for her. Just leave her free to follow
of the following grounds: opportunities she made herself.
i. He is not obliged to throw obstacles in her
(1) Where the aggrieved party has condoned the offense or act of way, but he must not smooth her path to
complained of; the adulterous bed. So, if hubby pretends
(2) Where the aggrieved party has consented to the commission to go out one night, and returns to catch
of the offense or act complained of; wife, no connivance.
(3) Where there is connivance between the parties in the ii. Hubby also must not participate in
commission of the offense or act constituting the ground for preparing for suspected misconduct by
legal separation; actively providing opportunity, whether
(4) Where both parties have given ground for legal separation; directly or thru an agent, even if agent was
(5) Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain the not authorized so to act. So, if hubby hires a
decree of legal separation; or detective to catch wife, but detective “aids”
(6) Where the action is barred by prescription. (100a) in the opportunity, legal separation can be
denied.
1. Condonation as defense. 4. Recrimination as defense.
a. It is always a condition that wrongdoer shall not again a. Recrimination – countercharge in suit for LS, that
commit the offense; and a breach of such will revive complainant is also guilty of grounds for LS. “Come to
the offense as a ground for legal separation. court with clean hands”.
b. Condonation may be express or implied i. Does not matter who was guilty first, or
i. Express – by word or writing who was guiltier.
ii. Implied – when may be inferred from acts 5. Effect of collusion. Can be inferred from act of parties if not
of injured party. express. LS can be denied.
c. Mere offer of reconciliation by wronged spouse = a. If court declares LS because it is unaware of collusion,
condonation. decree is void, and the case is a fraud upon the court.
d. When party has clear and convincing knowledge of Giving such decree validity is contrary to public policy.
such, and deliberately and willfully cohabits or has 6. Death of party. LS is a personal right and does not survive
sex with offender, s/he impliedly pardons offender. death. True even when LS has been granted but has not
2. Test of implied condonation. become entirely effective at time of death of a party.
a. Where a wife had sex with hubby after learning that
he and another woman were in the same hotel, but WILLIAN V WILLIAN (1960)
hubby denies sexual infidelity, and wife does not even
know what the hotel and rooms look like to know OCAMPO V FLORENCIANO (1960)
where and how wife and hubby were assigned to a
FACTS:
room  NOT considered condonation.
b. When wife attempts reconciliation for sake of Jose De Ocampo was married to Serafina Florenciano in 1938.
children  not condonation.
3. Consent or connivances. After several years of marriage, Jose learned of Serafina’s illicit
a. Consent – agreement or conformity in advance of relations with many men, including a Jose Arcalas. He then sent her
commission of act, which WOULD be ground for LS. to Manila as student of Beauty Culture.
Express or implied. Must be FREELY GIVEN.
i. Unilateral, not reciprocal. Until in 1955, after having been abandoned by Serafina, Luis caught
b. Connivance – implies agreement, express or implied, her in the act of having illicit relations with one Nelson Orzame.
by both spouses to the ground of LS.
Thereafter, he filed a petition for legal separation on the ground of
c. Corrupt consent by spouse to other’s offense bars
adultery.
suit for LS.
i. A hubby who connives in the adultery of his Serafina did not answer the suit and when interviewed by the fiscal,
wife, by procuring her to be lured into (Art. 101 NCC) she admitted to having sexual relations with several
commission, will be barred from suit. He men. Believing there was confession of judgment on the part of
has duty to protect his wife from Serafina, condonation or consent to the adultery and prescription,
temptation and not connive. since it was in 1951 when Luis learned of the illicit relations but only
ii. When hubby knows his wife is unable to filed the case in 1955, the court of first instance of Nueva Ecija and
resist temptation, then refuses to give her a the Court of Appeals dismissed the case on the grounds of Article
home with him and allows her to live under 101 of the NCC.
tempting circumstances, he cannot
complain when she does falls to ISSUE:
temptation.
iii. When wife leaves hubby, knowing he may WON the CA erred in affirming the decision of the trial court.
go to other women, and hubby did fulfill his HELD:
obligations to her before, her abandonment
implies consent and connivance. NOTE: the case deals with the adultery of the wife with Orzame
d. Test of connivance. If husband suspects his wife of (1955), as the adultery committed by her with Arcalas (1951) has
adultery and decides not to confront her yet to obtain
prescribed when this case was filed in 1955, 4 years too late. (Art amount to conclusive evidence of condonation, but this
102 NCC) presumption may be rebutted by evidence.

Condonation and Consent: Plaintiff’s failure to actively search for Even a singular voluntary act of marital intercourse between the
defendant and take her home constituted condonation or consent parties ordinarily is sufficient to constitute condonation, and if they
to her adulterous relations” since “it was not his duty to search for lived in the same house, it is presumed that they live on matrimonial
her to bring her home. Hers was the obligation to return. cohabitation.

Confession of Judgment: The trial court erred in the interpretation Art. 100 of the civil code states that legal separation may be claimed
of Article 101 of the New Civil Code. “As we (SC) understand the by the innocent spouse provided that there had been no
article, it does not exclude, as evidence, any admission or confession condonation or consent.
made by the defendant outside of the court. It merely prohibits a
decree of separation upon a confession of judgment. Confession of MATUBIS V PRAXEDES (1960)
judgment usually happens when the defendant appears in court and
PLAINTIFF: SOCORRO MATUBIS; DEFENDANT: ZOILO PRAXEDES
confesses the right of plaintiff to judgment or files a pleading
expressly agreeing to the plaintiff's demand… what the law prohibits DOCTRINE:
is a judgment based exclusively or mainly on defendant's confession.
If a confession defeats the action ipso facto, any defendant who Consent: Under Article 100 of the Civil Code, legal separation may
opposes the separation will immediately confess judgment, be claimed only by the innocent spouse, provided that there is no
purposely to prevent it.” Moreover, when the court learned that the condonation of … the adultery or concubinage. This condonation
“defendant equally desires the separation and admitted the may be express or implied; Prescription: Under Article 102 of the
commission of the offense, it should be doubly careful lest a new Civil Code, an action for legal separation cannot be filed except
collusion exists. within one year from and after the date on which the plaintiff
became cognizant of the cause.
Griffiths v Griffiths: Collusion - the agreement “between
NATURE OF PETITION: Plaintiff-appellant appealed from the
husband and wife for one of them to commit or to appear to decision of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur dismissing
commit, or to be represented in court as having committed, a her complaint for legal separation and change of surname based on
matrimonial offense, or to suppress evidence of a valid defense, for the alleged abandonment and concubinage of the defendant-
the purpose of enabling the other to obtain a divorce”. appellee. Her reasons for the appeal are: (1) the lower Court erred in
having considered that the period to bring action had already
BUGAYONG V GINEZ (1956)
elapsed, and (2) that there was consent on the part of the plaintiff to
PETITION: Petition for appeal of the dismissal of the CA on the legal the concubinage.
separation case of the petitioner, on the grounds of adultery.
FACTS:
FACTS:
In January 1943, Socorro Matibus (plaintiff) and Zoilo Praxedes
Bugayong, a serviceman in the US Navy, married Ginez on 1949 After (defendant) legally married at Iriga, Camarines Sur.
some time, when husband went back to the US again, he began
In May 1944, the couple agreed to live from each other because
receiving letters from Valeriana Polangco, his sisterin-law, and some
they could not agree on how to live as husband and wife.
anonymous writers, alleging acts of infidelity of his wife (1951) A
letter from his wife, which he said that he destroyed, said that a In April 1948, plaintiff and defendantentered into an agreement,
certain 'Eliong' kissed her (1952) he went to Pangasinan and stayed with the significant portion (to the case) provided below:
with his wife for 2 nights & 1 day He tried to verify from his wife the
veracity of the info, but she just packed hear things and left. Despite (b) That both without any interference by any of us, nor either of us
the answer, he kept on looking for her, and upon failing to do so, can prosecute the other for adultery or concubinage or any other
went to igloos Norte "to soothe his wounded feelings" (1952) crime or suit arising from our separation.
husband filed a case of legal separation at the CFI of Pangasinan, but
was dismissed on the issue of condonation of husband of the acts of In January 1955, defendant began cohabiting with Asuncion
the wife. Rebulado and they deported themselves as husband and wife. In
September of the same year, their common child was born.
ISSUE: WON the act of sleeping with his wife constitutes
condonation of the act of adultery, thus being a valid defense for In April 1956, plaintiff filed for the complaint for legal separation and
legal separation change of surname against the defendant. After the trial in the
lower court, without the defendant presenting any evidence, the
HELD: latter rendered that the actions of the defendant did constitute
concubinage; however, they had to dismiss the petition based on
YES. It is an act of condonation Defined as the forgiveness of a Articles 102 and 100 of the new Civil Code (discussed under nature
marital offense constituting a ground for legal separation; of petition):
conditional forgiveness or remission of a matrimonial offense.
(1) The plaintiff became aware of the illegal cohabitation of her
We are assuming that plaintiff's line of conduct that he really husband with Asuncion Rebulado in January, 1955. The
believed his wife guilty of adultery, as the issue on the letters are complaint was filed on April 24, 1956. The present action was,
not on question According to American jurisprudence, any therefore, filed out of time and for that reason action is barred.
cohabitation with the guilty party, after the commission of the (2) The plaintiff has consented to the commission of concubinage
offense, and the knowledge of such by the injured party, will by her husband. Her consent is clear from the aforementioned
portion of the agreement (b). Having consented to the HELD:
concubinage, the plaintiff cannot claim legal separation.
1. NO.
ISSUE: 2. The husband was assuming a mere pose when he signed the
complaint as the “offended spouse”.
1. WON the lower Court erred in having considered that the 3. Based on the evidence and his conduct, he CONSENTED to the
period to bring action had already elapsed. adulterous relations of his wife and her lover; therefore he is
a. NO. unauthorized to institute the criminal proceeding.
b. Based on their interpretation by the Court of Article a. Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code, paragraphs 1
102 of the new Civil Code, the complaint was indeed and 2, are as follows: "Prosecution of the crimes of
filed outside the periods provided for in the Article. adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape
By the very admission of plaintiff, she came to know and acts of lasciviousness. — The crimes of adultery
the concubinage in January, 1955, but she only and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon
instituted the complaint only on April 24, 1956. a complaint filed by the offended spouse. "The
2. WON there was consent on the part of the plaintiff to the offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution
concubinage. without including both the guilty parties, if they are
a. YES. both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have consented
b. Condonation and consent on the part of plaintiff are or pardoned the offenders."
necessarily the quoted paragraph of the agreement. 4. No merit in the argument which states that it was impossible
The condonation and consent here are not only for the husband to take any action against the accused during
implied but expressed. the said seven years.
c. As a matter of fact, the counsel of the plaintiff does
agree with the court’s decision that the complaint SARGENT V SARGENT (1920)
should be dismissed; however, it does not agree that
it should be dismissed based on the grounds laid out NATURE: Donald Sargent is filing for divorce with Frances Sargent
by the lower Court. They argue that it should be because of an allegation of adultery. Court says no adultery took
based on the fact that the couple have already been place.
living legally separately from each other long before
FACTS:
the effectivity of the new Civil Code. The Court cannot
subscribe to this contention because it is contrary to Donald and Frances Sargent are married since September 22, 1909.
the law. Donald filed a petition charging Frances of committing adultery (1)
d. Conformably with the foregoing, we find that the on various days in November 1917 with an unknown man; (2) at an
decision appealed from is in accordance with the unknown time and place where she contracted gonorrhea; (3) based
evidence and the law on the matter. The same is on her relationship with Charles Simmons. In order to prove the
hereby affirmed, with costs. occurrence of adultery, he did not come home on two occasions and
facilitated a scenario framing Frances committing adulterous acts
PEOPLE V SENSANO AND RAMOS (1933)
with Charles. Donald gathered the help of servants in his household
FACTS: to provide testimonies of Frances’ alleged adulterous acts such as:

1. Ursula Sensano and Mariano Ventura were married on April 29, 1. [Ida Lewis] – that Frances discussed the issue of the possibility
1919. of interracial marriage (which was considered against morals at
2. After the birth of their only child, Mariano left them to go to that time)
Cagayan for 3 years without any letter or support even if his 2. [Charlotte Lunford] – that Charles is always at Frances’ room,
wife is actually poor, illiterate, and without any relatives to sometimes even going there three times a day.
contact for help. 3. [Viola Jones] – that Frances and Charles drink and laugh
3. During that period, Ursula met Marcelo Ramos who took her together from time to time
and her child with him. 4. [Mack Jetter] – that Frances invited Charles to her room
4. Mariano returned in 1924 and subsequently charged his wife dressed in her nightgown, pulling Charles toward her.
and Marcelo of adultery. o They were sentenced to 4 months
Donald also hired detectives Tienken and Wilsdon to listen to the
and 1 day of arresto mayor.
conversations between Frances and Charles through a dictograph
5. Ursula, after completing her sentence, begged his husband for
which both claim that Frances called Charles as “Dearie”.
forgiveness.
a. He refused to pardon her and told her that she could (Not surprisingly), Frances and Charles denied the allegation. The
go where she wished. court expressed its disbelief of the story presented by Donald and
b. She then went back to Marcelo and lived with him his witnesses because of the sources it came from, specifically, all of
once more. (still in 1924) the witnesses Donald presented were under his payroll.
c. Mariano did not assert his rights as a husband, and Furthermore, the court said:
even went to Hawaii where he stayed for 7 years
completely abandoning his family. To accept such a story would be to say that every woman in her
6. Upon Mariano’s return to PH, he again charged his wife and her home is at the mercy of servants who, for pay or to satisfy a grudge,
paramour of adultery to obtain a divorce under Act No. 2710. might relate a tale which only their mistress and the alleged
correspondent could deny.
ISSUE: WON Mariano can file charges of adultery for the second
time despite the fact that he seemingly consented with his wife’s ISSUE: (Because judge had doubts) WON Donald connived with his
actions. employees and hired detectives to set-up Frances’ alleged adultery
HELD: As far as Estrellita is concerned, Sen. Tamano’s previous marriage to
Zorayda is already severed via by means of divorce under PD 1083
Yes. The court felt that most of the testimonies were inconclusive of (law which codified Muslim personal laws)
the allegations of adultery and even found some contradictions in
the stories presented such as whether at the time they allegedly However, PD 1083 cannot benefit Estrellita. Reasons:
caught Frances and Charles committing to adultery, the door was
locked (according to Charlotte) or half-open (according to the 1. Article 13(1) thereof provides that the law applies to
detectives). There were also peculiarities that the court cannot “marriage and divorce wherein both parties are Muslims,
resolve such as why the witnesses waited for 2 hours and 20 or wherein only the male party is a Muslim and the
minutes for adultery to occur and not find any conclusive evidence marriage is solemnized in accordance with Muslim law or
that such event transpired this Code in any part of the Philippines.”
2. BUT there is no provision for when the parties were
Finally, the court posed the question, if there was any doubt as to married both in civil and Muslim rites.”
the fidelity of Frances, why did Donald create a possibility of Frances
being in contact with Charles? Donald did not do anything to protect BROWN V YAMBAO (1957)
her wife from Charles’ alleged evil influence.
FACTS:
Donald, instead, orchestrated a scenario to make it more likely for
1955 – Brown filed for legal separation from his wife Yambao due to
Frances to commit adulterous acts; solidifying the fact that Charles
adultery while he was in the internment camp during the Japanese
did connive with his employees to frame Frances of adultery.
invasion his wife had a baby with another man, which he learned on
[No adultery took place.] 1945 upon his release. The wife failed to answer and was held in
default. The City Fiscal conducted an investigation and found that
LLAVE V REPUBLIC (2011) Brown also lived martially with another woman and had a child with
her after his release.
FACTS:
ISSUE: WON prosecuting officer is limited to finding out if there is
1. [Procedural history: This petition for review on certiorari assails collusion.
the Decision dated August 17, 2004 of the Court of Appeals (CA)
in CA- G.R. CV No. 61762 and its subsequent Resolution dated HELD:
September 13, 2005, which affirmed the Decision of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 89 declaring Court held that according to CC ART. 100, The legal separation may
petitioner (Estrellita) marriage to Sen. Mamintal A.J. Tamano be claimed only by the innocent spouse, provided there has been no
(Sen. Tamano) as void ab initio.] condonation or of consent to the adultery or concubinage. Where
2. (11) months before his death, Sen. Tamano married Estrellita both spouses are offenders, legal separation cannot be claimed by
twice either of them. Collusion between the parties to obtain legal
a. Islamic laws and tradition on May 27, 1993 in separation shall cause the dismissal of the petition. The policy of
Cotabato City and Article 101 of the new Civil Code, calling for the intervention of the
b. Civil ceremony officiated by an RTC Judge at state attorneys in case of uncontested proceedings for legal
Malabang, Lanao del Sur on June 2, 1993. separation (and of annulment of marriages, under Article 88), is to
3. In their marriage contracts, Sen. Tamano’s civil status was emphasize that marriage is more than a mere contract; that it is a
indicated as “divorced.‟ social institution in which the state is vitally interested, so that its
4. Estrellita then started representing herself publicly as Sen. continuation or interruption cannot be made depend upon the
Tamano’s wife, and upon his death, his widow. parties themselves CC 52. It is consonant with this policy that the
5. On November 23, 1994, private respondents Haja Putri Zorayda injury by the Fiscal should be allowed to focus upon any relevant
A. Tamano (Zorayda) and her son Adib Ahmad A. Tamano matter that may indicate whether the proceedings for separation or
(Adib), in behalf of the rest of Sen. Tamano’s legitimate annulment are fully justified or not.
children, filed a complaint with the RTC of Quezon City for the
OBITER:
declaration of nullity of marriage Estrellita and Sen. Tamano
for being bigamous. Article 102 of the new Civil Code, action for legal separation cannot
a. That Sen. Tamano married Zorayda on May 31, 1958 be filed except within one (1) year from and after the plaintiff
under civil rights, and that this marriage remained became cognizant of the cause and within five years from and after
subsisting when he married Estrellita in 1993. the date when such cause occurred. In this case, Brown only filed for
legal separation after 10 years of knowing about Yambao’s infidelity
ISSUE: WON marriage between Estrellita and late Sen. Tamano was
therefore action for legal separation on the basis of her infidelity has
bigamous.
prescribed.
HELD:
LEGAL SEPARATION; PRESCRIPTION
The marriage between the late Sen. Tamano and Zorayda was
celebrated in 1958 and was solemnized under civil and Muslim rites. Art 57 FC. An action for legal separation shall be files within FOUR
The law in force then concerning marriage relationships between YEARS from the time of the occurrence of the cause. (102a)
Muslim sand non-Muslims was the Civil Code of 1950, which says
1. Versus Civil Code.
that only one marriage can exist at any given time. a. (1) year from date the plaintiff became cognizant of
Furthermore, based on Civil Code, divorce is not recognized except the cause, and (5) years from when the cause
during the effectivity of Republic Act No. 394 which was not availed occurred.
of during its effectivity.
2. Knowledge of cause. Law does not encourage LS and provides preliminary injunction to restrain her husband, who was the sole
for prescription of action even when offended party had no administrator of their conjugal property, from alienating or
knowledge. There are grounds for LS whose occurrence may be encumbering the same. Respondent Judge Villareal granted the
unknown to plaintiff (e.g. attempt of other party to induce a motion, prompting the husband to file this present case of petition
child to engage in prostitution; contracting by other spouse of for certiorari on the ground that the judge had no jurisdiction to
subsequent bigamous marriage; sexual infidelity of other take cognizance of the action and that exceeded his power and
spouse). If plaintiff dos not come to know of the ground, and authority in issuing the preliminary injunction.
(5) years pass since occurrence, cannot sue for LS.
ISSUE/HOLDING:
Art 58 FC. An action for legal separation shall in no case be tried
before (6) months shall have passed since the filing of the petition. WON the wife validly acquired a residence or domicile separate
(103a) from that of her husband during the subsistence of their marriage.

1. Reason. To give spouses a chance to reconcile. During this YES. The general rule that the domicile of the wife follows that of
period, passion may subside, there may be forgiveness, and the husband is not an absolute rule. Here, De La Vina unlawfully
reconciliation may take place. ejected Geopano from the conjugal home to have illicit relations
a. This does not override other provisions of the FC, with another woman, giving Geopano more than enough
such as the determination of custody of children, justification to establish her domicile elsewhere, lest her continued
alimony and support pendente lite. cohabitation give the impression of condonation to said illicit affairs.
It is well established in various jurisprudence that the wife may
Art 59 FC. No legal separation may be decrees unless the Court has acquire a separate residence where the husband has given cause for
taken steps towards the reconciliation of the spouses and is fully divorce, which in this case, is De La Vina’s having committed
satisfied, despite such effort, that reconciliation is highly concubinage. Having established this, it follows that the Geopano
improbable. could file the case of divorce to the RTC of Iloilo, instead of the RTC
that has jurisdiction over De La Vina’s residence, which the latter
1. Duty of the Court to do this, even if there is a valid ground. The insisted and which the court rejected.
effort of the Court is not limited to the period before trial (at
least 6 months), but may continue even after trial, before WON in an action for divorce, where conjugal property is
judgment is rendered. concerned, a preliminary injunction may be issued to restrain a
2. Not pressure, but persuasion and counsel. spouse from alienating/encumbering conjugal property during the
3. Reconciliation should be free and voluntary. pendency of the action.

Art 60 FC. No decree of legal separation shall be based upon a Yes. While the law grants the husband the
stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment.
power to solely administer the conjugal property without the
In any case, the court shall order the prosecuting attorney of fiscal consent of the wife, this legal maxim only holds true as long as a
assigned to it to take steps to prevent collusion between the harmonious relationship between them exists. When such relation
parties and to take care that the evidence is not fabricated or ceases, the husband’s powers of administration should be curtailed
suppressed. (101a) during the pendency of action to protect the interests of the wife.
The preliminary injunction prayed for by Geopano is well within
1. Necessity of proof. The proof of the offense must be specific to paragraphs 2 and 3 of section 164 of Act No. 190, and thus, the RTC
time, person, and place. judge didn’t commit any breach of jurisdiction in granting the same.
a. Circumstantial evidence is ok. Al song as it shows the
adulterous disposition of party. LEGAL SEPARATION; WHEN TO TRY ACTIONS
b. But a man who continues to live with his wife after he
discovers that she has syphilis cannot charge her with AM No. 02-11-11-SC (2003). [SEE APPENDIX]
adultery, merely on ground that she did not contract
such disease from him. AM No. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA (2011). [SEE ATTACHED]
c. Testimony of one spouse cannot be taken in
SOMOSA-RAMOS V VAMENTA (1972)
corroboration of the other.
2. Intervention of prosecuting attorney. Broad enough to FACTS:
authorize prosecution to oppose the application for LS thru
presentation of his own evidence, if in his opinion, the proof June 18, 1971 - Lucy Somosa-Ramos filed a civil case for legal
adduced is dubious or fabricated. separation on grounds of concubinage and an attempt to her life by
the respondent Clemente Ramos. She also sought for a writ of
CONTRERAS V MACARAIG (1970) preliminary mandatory injunction for the return to her of what she
claimed to be her paraphernal and exclusive property [managed by
FACTS: Clemente].
Narcissa Geopan filed a complaint of divorce in RTC Iloilo against her July 1971 – husband countered this by invoking Art. 103 of the Civil
husband, Diego de la Vina, on the ground of concubinage. Due to
Code which prohibits the hearing of an action for legal separation
said illicit relationship between her husband and one Ana Calog, she before the lapse of six months from filing of the petition.
was ejected from the conjugal home in Guijulngan, Negros
Occidental, and thereafter forced to establish her habitual residence Aug 4, 1971 – respondent Judge Cipriano Vamenat, Jr granted the
in the city of Iloilo, with no means to support herself other than motion of Clemente Ramos to suspend the hearing of the petition
through the expense of one of her daughters. Thus, she prayed for a for a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction sought by his wife
decree of divorce, partition of conjugal property, and alimony Lucy.
pendente. After filing the complaint, she presented a motion for
ISSUE: WON Article 103 of the Civil Code prohibiting the hearing of [SEE DIGEST ABOVE]
an action for legal separation before the lapse of six months from
the filing of the petition, would likewise preclude the court from EFFECTS OF FILING OF PETITION
acting on a motion for preliminary mandatory injunction applied for
as an ancillary remedy to such a suit Art 61 FC. After the filing of the petition for legal separation, the
spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other.
HOLDING:
The court, in the absence of a written agreement between the
NO. Art 103* is not an absolute bar to the hearing of motion for spouses, shall designate either of them or a third person to
preliminary injunction prior to the expiration of the six-month administer the absolute community or conjugal partnership
period. SC reversed respondent Judge’s suspension of petition for property. The administrator appointed by the court shall have the
writ of preliminary mandatory injunction. same powers and duties as those of a guardian under the Rules of
Court. (104a)
Art. 104* eases the absolute limitation from which the court suffers
under Art. 103. The court said that by reading Art 104 in relation to Art 62 FC. During the pendency of the action for legal separation,
Art 103, there appears to be recognition that the question of the provisions of Article 491 shall likewise apply to the support of
management of their respective property need not be left the spouses and the custody and support of the common children.
unresolved even during such six-month period. Thus, the parties (105a)
may be heard even w/o waiting for the lapse of the six-month
period. Citing Araneta v Conception: “XXX But this practical 1. Effects of filing petition.
expedient [six-month delay period for hearing], necessary to carry a. The spouses can live separately from each other; in
out legislative policy, does not have the effect of overriding other other words, plaintiff can have a separate domicile of
provisions such as the determination of the custody of the children his or her own, independently of that of the
and alimony and support pendente lite according to the defendant.
circumstance ...The law expressly enjoins that these should be b. The administration of the common property, whether
determined by the court according to the circumstances. If these are in absolute community or conjugal partnership of
ignored or the courts close their eyes to actual facts, rank injustice gains, shall be given by the Court to either of the
may be caused." spouses or to a third person, as is best for the
interests of the community.
Also, from Aug. 4 1971 to July 29, 1972 [date of SC decision], six c. In the absence of a written agreement of the spouses,
months have already lapsed thus no impediment for lower court to the Court shall provide for the support between the
act on the motion of the petitioner [moot and academic na ang spouses and the custody and support of the common
case?] children, taking into account the welfare of the
children and their choice of the parent with whom
Rationale behind Art 103: they wish to remain.
d. When the consent of one spouse to any transaction
Special nature of suit for legal separation: it is relationship w/c the
of the other is required by law, judicial authorization
law attaches the
shall be necessary, unless such spouse voluntarily
QUALITY OF PERMANENCE ‘Cooling off’ period: recital of grievances gives such consent.
against each other in court may fan their inflamed passions against 2. Alimony “pendente lite”. Duty of Court to grant alimony to
one another wife and make provisions for the support of the children not in
the possession of father. Support may be taken from properties
*Art. 103 CC [Art. 58, FC] An action for legal separation shall in no of ACP or CPG (Art 1982).
case be tried before six months shall have elapsed since the filing of a. But an action for LS is based on assumption that there
the petition is a valid subsisting marriage. Hence, where answer
denies existence of such marriage, the alimony
*Article 104 CC [Art. 61, FC] After the filing of the petition for legal ”pendente lite” should be denied.
separation, the spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each b. If defendant fails to comply with order of court
other and manage their respective property. granting alimony “pendente lite”, he is to show cause
why he should not be punished for contempt.
The husband shall continue to manage the conjugal partnership
i. If defendant appears to have means to pay
property but if the court deems it proper, it may appoint another to
alimony refuses, either order of execution
manage said property, in which case the administrator shall have the
or penalty for contempt, or both.
same rights and duties as a guardian and shall not be allowed to
c. Amount of support “pendente lite” is not final and
dispose of the income or of the capital except in accordance with
may still be changed depending on resources of
the orders of the court.
obligor. Grant is to discretion of the Court.
OCAMPO V FLORENCIANO, SUPRA 3. Custody of children. While LS is pending, custody of children
may be determined in 2 ways:

1During the pendency of the action and in the absence of adequate 2Art 198. During the proceedings for legal separation or for annulment of
provisions in a written agreement between the spouses, the Court shall marriage, and for declaration of nullity of marriage, the spouses and their
provide for the support of the spouses and the custody and support of their children shall be supported from the properties of the absolute community
common children. The Court shall give paramount consideration to the moral or the conjugal partnership. After the final judgment granting the petition,
and material welfare of said children and their choice of the parent with the obligation of mutual support between the spouses ceases. However, in
whom they wish to remain as provided to in Title IX. It shall also provide for case of legal separation, the court may order that the guilty spouse shall give
appropriate visitation rights of the other parent. (n) support to the innocent one, specifying the terms of such order. (292a)
a. Agreement of spouses, unless prejudicial to children. PETITION DENIED.
b. Court order, based on sound discretion of judge and
welfare of children. Art 493 and 2134 should still be REYES V INES-LUCIANO (1979)
considered.
PETITIONER: MANUEL J. C. REYES,
DE LA VINA V VILLAREAL (1920)
RESPONDENTS: HON. LEONOR INES-LUCIANO, as Judge of the
FACTS: Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court, Quezon City, COURT OF
APPEALS and CELIA ILUSTRE-REYES,.
Narcissa Geopan filed a complaint of divorce in RTC Iloilo against her
husband, Diego de la Vina, on the ground of concubinage. Due to FACTS:
said illicit relationship between her husband and one Ana Calog, she
Celia filed for legal separation against her husband Manuel due to
was ejected from the conjugal home in Guijulngan, Negros
his attempts to her life cited in 2 instances:
Occidental, and thereafter forced to establish her habitual residence
in the city of Iloilo, with no means to support herself other than 1) On Mar. 10, 1976, Manuel pummeled her with fist blows that
through the expense of one of her daughters. Thus, she prayed for a floored her, then held her head and, with intent to kill, bumped
decree of divorce, partition of conjugal property, and alimony it several times against the cement floor. When she ran upstairs
pendente. After filing the complaint, she presented a motion for to her father for protection, he pushed her at the stairway of
preliminary injunction to restrain her husband, who was the sole flights and she fell sliding to the ground floor. Determined to
administrator of their conjugal property, from alienating or finish her off, he again gave her a strong swing at her abdomen
encumbering the same. Respondent Judge Villareal granted the which floored her half unconscious. Were it not for plaintiff's
motion, prompting the husband to file this present case of petition father, he would have succeeded killing her;
for certiorari on the ground that the judge had no jurisdiction to 2) On May 26, 1976, she went to their house to get her overnight
take cognizance of the action and that exceeded his power and bag. Upon seeing her, defendant yelled at her to get out. When
authority in issuing the preliminary injunction. she did not mind him, he suddenly doused her with a glass of
grape juice, kicked her several times that landed at her back
ISSUE/ HOLDING:
and nape, and was going to hit her with a steel tray as her
WON the wife validly acquired a residence or domicile separate driver, Ricardo Mancera, came due to her screams for help. For
from that of her husband during the subsistence of their marriage. fear of further injury and for life, she rushed to Precinct 5 at
United Nations Avenue, Manila Metropolitan Police, for
YES. The general rule that the domicile ofthe wife follows that of the assistance and protection.
husband is not an absolute rule. Here, De La Vina unlawfully ejected
Geopano from the conjugal home to have illicit relations with Celia asked for support pendente lite for her and her three children
another woman, giving Geopano more than enough justification to but Manuel opposed this, alleging adultery on the part of Celia.
establish her domicile elsewhere, lest her continued cohabitation Respondent judge granted P5,000 which was reduced to P4,000
give the impression of condonation to said illicit affairs. It is well because the children are in the custody of the husband upon motion
established in various jurisprudence that the wife may acquire a for reconsideration of Manuel. Manuel filed for certiorari at the CA
separate residence where the husband has given cause for divorce, but the CA affirmed the RTC. Hence this petition for certiorari.
which in this case, is De La Vina’s having committed concubinage.
ISSUE: WON alimony pendente lite should be granted to the wife
Having established this, it follows that the Geopano could file the
while the legal separation case is pending given that there is an
case of divorce to the RTC of Iloilo, instead of the RTC that has
allegation of adultery on her part?
jurisdiction over De La Vina’s residence, which the latter insisted and
which the court rejected. HELD:
WON in an action for divorce, where conjugal property is YES. The Court denied the petition of the husband and affirmed the
concerned, a preliminary injunction may be issued to restrain a Court of Appeals decision with modification granting the support
spouse from alienating/encumbering conjugal property during the pendente lite at the rate of P4,000 a month. Court held that while
pendency of the action. adultery is a defense in an action for support, the alleged adultery
must be established by competent evidence. During the hearing,
Yes. While the law grants the husband the power to solely
Manuel did not present any evidence to prove the allegation. The
administer the conjugal property without the consent of the wife,
adultery may still be proved in the hearing of the legal separation.
this legal maxim only holds true as long as a harmonious relationship
between them exists. When such relation ceases, the husband’s In determining the amount, it is not necessary to go to the full
powers of administration should be curtailed during the pendency of merits of the case. It is sufficient that the court ascertain the kind
action to protect the interests of the wife. The preliminary injunction and amount of evidence which it may deem sufficient to enable it to
prayed for by Geopano is well within paragraphs 2 and 3 of section justly resolve the application, in view of the provisional character of
164 of Act No. 190, and thus, the RTC judge didn’t commit any the resolution.
breach of jurisdiction in granting the same.

3Art 49. During the pendency of the action and in the absence of adequate
provisions in a written agreement between the spouses, the Court shall 4Art 213. In case of separation of the parents, parental authority shall be
provide for the support of the spouses and the custody and support of their exercised by the parent designated by the Court. The Court shall take into
common children. The Court shall give paramount consideration to the moral account all relevant considerations, especially the choice of the child over
and material welfare of said children and their choice of the parent with seven years of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit. (n)
whom they wish to remain as provided to in Title IX. It shall also provide for
appropriate visitation rights of the other parent. (n)
It was also noted that Celia was not asking for support from the  Death has settled the question of separation beyond all
husband’s personal funds but from the conjugal property of which controversy and deprived the court of jurisdiction.
Manuel is the president, manager and treasurer. It is also cited that
the husband can afford the support given that they have various Further, an action for legal separation is abated by the death of the
corporations. plaintiff, even if property rights are involved. These rights are mere
effects of decree of separation, their source being the decree itself;
GANDIONCO V PENARANDA, SUPRA without the decree such rights do not come into existence, so that
before the finality of a decree, these claims are merely rights in
PETITIONER: Froilan Gandionco expectation. If death supervenes during the pendency of the action,
no decree can be forthcoming, death producing a more radical and
RESPONDENT: Hon. Seven Penaranda and Teresita Gandionco
definitive separation; and the expected consequential rights and
This is a special civil action for certiorari, with application for claims would necessarily remain unborn.
injunction, to annul the Order of the respondent Judge ordering
Froilan to pay support pendente lite to Teresita and their child, and LEGAL SEPARATION; EFFECTS OF DECREE
the Order of the same respondent Judge, dated 5 August 1987,
Art 63 FC. The decree of legal separation shall have the following
denying petitioner's motion to suspend hearings in the action for
effects:
legal separation filed against him by private respondent as well as
his motion to inhibit respondent Judge from further hearing and (1) The spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other,
trying the case. but the marriage bonds shall not be severed;
FACTS: (2) The absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be
dissolved and liquidated but the offending spouse shall have no
29 May 1986: Teresita filed with the RTC of Misamis Oriental,
right to any share of the net profits earned by the absolute
Cagayan de Oro City, presided over by respondent Judge, a
community or the conjugal partnership, which shall be forfeited in
complaint against petitioner for legal separation, on the ground of
accordance with the provisions of Article 43(2)5;
concubinage.
(3) The custody of the minor children shall be awarded to the
13 October 1986: Teresita also filed a criminal case to the MTC of
innocent spouse, subject to the provisions of Article 213 of this
General Santos City, a complaint against petitioner for concubinage.
Code; and
Froilan claims that the civil action for legal separation and the
(4) The offending spouse shall be disqualified from inheriting from
application for support pendente lite, should be suspended in view
the innocent spouse by intestate succession. Moreover, provisions
of the criminal case for concubinage filed against him the private
in favor of the offending spouse made in the will of the innocent
respondent.
spouse shall be revoked by operation of law. (106a)
He cites Art. III. Sec. 3 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure:
1. Marriage bond subsists. Mutual fidelity remains. In case
SEC. 3. Other Civil action arising from offenses. — Whenever the adultery or concubinage, penal sanction.
offended party shall have instituted the civil action to enforce the 2. Support and assistance. After LS, obligation of mutual support
civil liability arising from the offense. as contemplated in the first between spouses ceases. But Court may order guilty spouse to
Section 1 hereof, the following rules shall be observed: (a) After a support innocent (Art 198).
criminal action has been commenced the pending civil action arising 3. Access by other parent. Parent who was given adverse
from the same offense shall be suspended, in whatever stage it may judgment of LS has natural rights with respect to child who was
be found, until final judgment in the criminal proceeding has been left to plaintiff, such as access to child under court regulation,
rendered. unless s/he forfeits such privilege or access would be injurious
to child.
ISSUE: WON the criminal case for concubinage should be settled 4. Successional rights. Guilty spouse is disqualified to succeed
before the civil case for legal separation can proceed. innocent. Not entitled to legitime also.
a. Testamentary dispositions in favor of guilty, written
HELD: by innocent before LS, is ipso jure inoperative.
An action for legal separation which involves nothing more than the b. Testamentary disposition… after LS is valid.
bed-and-board separation of the spouses is purely personal. It is 5. Division of properties. Decree of separation which does not yet
recognized in Article 100 of the Civil Code where only the innocent include order of division of properties in NOT incomplete
spouse has the right to claim for legal separation. On the other judgment. Such decree, if not appealed, is final and executory.
hand, Article 108 provides the spouses to stop or abate the a. Art 63 mandates dissolution and liquidation of
proceedings and even rescind a decree of legal separation already property regime upon finality of decree of LS.
rendered through reconciliation. Since it is personal in character, it b. They are necessary consequences, and are ipso facto,
follows that the death of one party to the action causes the death of or automatic – for purpose of determining share of
the action itself each spouse in conjugal assets.
c. A supplemental decision on division of property is
mere incident of decree of LS, the latter being the

5Art 43(2). The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership, in favor of the common children or, if there are none, the children of the
as the case may be, shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spouse guilty spouse by a previous marriage or in default of children, the innocent
contracted said marriage in bad faith, his or her share of the net profits of spouse;
the community property or conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited
main judgment which, if not appealed, will become i. The conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is
final and executory. located shall go to the spouse with whom majority of
d. Rules on dissolution and liquidation of property the common children remain, unless otherwise
regime shall apply. stipulated. The court will decide, if there is no
majority.
FROM QUIAO V QUAIO:

1. Art. 102(4) of the Family Code provides that “net profits


earned” “shall be the increase in value between the market Art 64 FC. After the finality of the decree of legal separation, the
value of the community property at the time of the celebration innocent spouse may revoke the donations made by him or by her
of the marriage and the market value at the time of its in favor of the offending spouse, as well as the designation of the
dissolution.” latter as beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such
a. For the purposes of dissolution and liquidation, the designation be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation of the
definition of Art 102(4) shall govern, both for ACP donations shall be recorded in the registries of property in the
(Art. 102) and CPG (Art. 129). With Art. 129, Art. places where the properties are located. Alienations, liens and
102(4) only serves to DEFINE “net profit”. encumbrances registered in good faith before the recording of the
complaint for revocation in the registries of property shall be
ACP: respected. The revocation of or change in the designation of the
a. An inventory listing separately the absolute insurance beneficiary shall take effect upon written notification
community properties and the exclusive properties of thereof to the insured.
each spouse shall be made.
b. Debts and obligations of the absolute community will The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be
be paid out of the absolute community’s assets. If brought within five (5) years from the time the decree of legal
insufficient, the separate properties of each spouse separation become final. (107a)
will be solidarily liable.
c. Whatever’s left of the separate properties will be Rules on Legal Separation AM No. 02-11-11-SC (2003).
returned to each spouse.
Section 19. Issuance of Decree of Legal Separation.
d. The net remainder of the absolute community is its
net assets, which will be divided equally between the (a) The court shall issue the Decree of Legal Separation after:
spouses.
e. To compute net profits subject to forfeiture: [net (1) registration of the entry of judgment granting the
profits] = [market value of the absolute community petition tor legal separation in the Civil Registry where
(net assets after payment of debts) at the time of the marriage was celebrated and in the Civil Registry
dissolution] – [market value of the absolute where the Family Court is located; and
community at the time of celebration of marriage]
(Note: the presumption is that, over time, the (2) registration of the approved partition and distribution
absolute community’s value increased from the time of the properties of the spouses, in the proper Register of
they were married to the time they decided to call it Deeds where the real properties are located.
quits.) (b) The court shall quote in the Decree the dispositive portion of
the judgment entered and attach to the Decree the approved deed
CPG: of partition.
a. An inventory listing separately the conjugal
partnership properties and the exclusive properties of Section 20. Registration and publication of the Decree of Legal
each spouse shall be made. Separation; decree as best evidence. -
b. Amounts advanced by the conjugal partnership in
payment of personal debts of either spouse shall be (a) Registration of decree.- The prevailing party shall cause the
credited as assets of the conjugal partnership. registration of the Decree in the Civil Registry where the marriage
c. Each spouse will be reimbursed the exclusive funds was registered, in the Civil Registry of the place where the Family
used to buy property, or the value of exclusive Court is situated, and in the National Census and Statistics Office.
property, if the law transferred ownership of such He shall report to the court compliance with this requirement
properties to the conjugal partnership. within thirty (30) days iron receipt of the copy of the Decree.
d. Debts and obligations of the conjugal partnership will
(b) Publication of decree.-- In case service of summons was made
be paid out of the conjugal partnership’s assets. If
by publication, the parties shall cause the publication of the Decree
insufficient, the separate properties of each spouse
once in a newspaper of general circulation.
will be solidarily liable.
e. Whatever’s left of the separate properties will be (c) Best evidence.- The registered Decree shall be the best evidence
returned to each spouse. to prove the legal separation of the parties and shall serve as
f. The loss or deterioration of movables belonging to notice to third persons concerning the properties of petitioner and
either spouse, if used for the benefit of the family, respondent.
shall be paid to the corresponding spouse from the
conjugal funds. LEGAL SEPARATION; EFFECTS OF DECREE;
g. The net remainder of the conjugal partnership DISSOLUTION AND LIQUIDATION OF ACP OR CPG
properties is its profits, to be divided equally between
the spouses, unless otherwise stipulated/provided. QUIAO V QUIAO, 2012
h. Presumptive legitimes of the common children shall
be delivered upon the partition (Art. 51). DOCTRINE:
1. Property settlement is a bitch. reglementary period to appeal. This is not the case,
2. (But seriously) Whether because of annulment or legal because a judgment is void only when the court
separation, Arts. 102 and 129 of the Family Code apply when it rendering it has no power to grant the relief, or no
comes to liquidation of Absolute Community assets and jurisdiction over the subject matter or the parties.
Conjugal Property assets, respectively, depending on the The RTC in this case had the power and the
property regime of the spouses. jurisdiction over the case, hence, the judgment was
3. Without stipulation, marriages before the Family Code are not void. Being valid, the Decision attained finality
under CPG, and marriages after are under ACP. when no appeal was filed within the reglementary
period.
2. Whether Art. 129 or Art. 102 of the Family Code applies in the
FACTS: computation of properties in this case.
a. Art. 129 applies.
 Brigido and Rita were married sometime in 1977. The Civil
b. While the couple was married before the effectivity
Code (not Family Code) governed their marriage, and
of the Family Code, their separation took place when
because they did not stipulate a property regime, theirs
the said Code was operative; therefore, the Family
was automatically a Conjugal Partnership of Gains. In
Code is the applicable law in the liquidation of CPG
2000, Rita filed a complaint for legal separation against
assets and liabilities.
Brigido.
c. Brigido did not lose his vested right in the properties
 October 10, 2005 – the RTC granted the separation. It also
because he was accorded his right to due process,
ruled that:
evident in the court processes he went through. Also,
o Rita gets custody of the three minor children;
Art. 176 of the Family Code specifically states that the
o The eight remaining properties be equally
guilty spouse must forfeit his/her share in the
divided between the spouses, subject to the
conjugal partnership profits.
respective legitimes of the children and the
d. Also, because the RTC’s Decision stated that Art. 129
payment of unpaid conjugal liabilities;
of the Family Code applies, and because that Decision
o Brigido’s share of the net profits earned by the
is final and executory, then Art. 129 should apply.
conjugal partnership is forfeited in favor of their
3. What is the meaning of the term “net profits earned”?
common children; and
a. Art. 102(4) of the Family Code provides that “net
o Brigido must reimburse attorney’s fees and
profits earned” “shall be the increase in value
litigation expenses.
between the market value of the community property
 No motion for reconsideration or appeal was filed
at the time of the celebration of the marriage and the
afterwards.
market value at the time of its dissolution.”
 Rita & co. filed a motion for execution on Dec. 12, 2005. It i. For the purposes of dissolution and
was granted on Dec. 16, and the Writ of Execution was liquidation, the definition of Art 102(4) shall
issued on Feb. 10, 2006. On July 6, 2006, Brigido partially govern, both for ACP (Art. 102) and CPG
complied by paying his share of the conjugal share, the (Art. 129). With Art. 129, Art. 102(4) only
attorney’s fees, and the litigation expenses. serves to DEFINE “net profit”.
 July 7, 2006 – Brigido filed a Motion for Clarification before
the RTC, asking them to define the term “net profits ACP:
earned”. a. An inventory listing separately the absolute
community properties and the exclusive properties of
RTC Ruling each spouse shall be made.
 August 31, 2006 – the RTC defined the term as “the b. Debts and obligations of the absolute community will
remainder of the properties of the parties after deducing be paid out of the absolute community’s assets. If
the separate properties of each spouse and the debts.” In insufficient, the separate properties of each spouse
this Order, the RTC also said that, because “the offending will be solidarily liable.
spouse” (Brigido) has no right to the remainder of the c. Whatever’s left of the separate properties will be
properties, it shall be forfeited in favor of the common returned to each spouse.
children pursuant to Arts. 63(2) and 43(2) of the Family d. The net remainder of the absolute community is its
Code. net assets, which will be divided equally between the
 November 8, 2006 – after Brigido filed a Motion for spouses.
Reconsideration, the RTC issued another Order. Here, the e. To compute net profits subject to forfeiture: [net
RTC held that the “net profits earned” should be profits] = [market value of the absolute community
computed in accordance with Art. 102(4) of the Family (net assets after payment of debts) at the time of
Code. dissolution] – [market value of the absolute
 January 8, 2007 – this time, Rita filed a Motion for community at the time of celebration of marriage]
Reconsideration and this Order set aside the Nov. 8 Order, (Note: the presumption is that, over time, the
and reinstated the Aug. 31 Order. absolute community’s value increased from the time
they were married to the time they decided to call it
ISSUE/HOLDING: quits.)
CPG:
1. WON the October 10, 2005 Decision of the RTC was final and j. An inventory listing separately the conjugal
executory by the time the July 7, 2006 Motion was filed. partnership properties and the exclusive properties of
a. Yes, it was. each spouse shall be made.
b. Brigido argues that he was questioning a void
judgment, therefore he was not limited by the
k. Amounts advanced by the conjugal partnership in (which she lost) concerning a house originally named to her but
payment of personal debts of either spouse shall be signed over to the husband around the time the marriage began to
credited as assets of the conjugal partnership. deteriorate.
l. Each spouse will be reimbursed the exclusive funds
used to buy property, or the value of exclusive ISSUE: WON trial court erred in ruling that wife was not entitled to
property, if the law transferred ownership of such equitable distribution of marital assets.
properties to the conjugal partnership.
HELD:
m. Debts and obligations of the conjugal partnership will
be paid out of the conjugal partnership’s assets. If Yes. The Ohio circuit court’s judgment was reversed; the case is
insufficient, the separate properties of each spouse remanded “for further consideration”.
will be solidarily liable.
n. Whatever’s left of the separate properties will be Equitable distribution of marital property began when the court’s
returned to each spouse. equitable powers are applied to secure equitable rights for one
o. The loss or deterioration of movables belonging to spouse in the property held by the other due to constructive trust
either spouse, if used for the benefit of the family, impressed on said property.
shall be paid to the corresponding spouse from the
conjugal funds. In Patterson v. Patterson, where the wife’s interest in property
p. The net remainder of the conjugal partnership toward which she had made a material economic contribution was
properties is its profits, to be divided equally between secured, constructive trust, particularly on property acquired
the spouses, unless otherwise stipulated/provided. through joint funds or efforts but in the name of only one spouse, is
q. Presumptive legitimes of the common children shall a redress against unjust enrichment (as it is unfair to permit the
be delivered upon the partition (Art. 51). possessing spouse to keep the entire interest where the other
r. The conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is supposedly has a material contribution to the acquisition of said
located shall go to the spouse with whom majority of property). This was used as a special equity doctrine.
the common children remain, unless otherwise South Carolina has applied this doctrine, which is, as defined in the
stipulated. The court will decide, if there is no Burgess case, the wife “is entitled to a special equity in the
majority. husband's property acquired during coverture where the wife has
made a material contribution to the acquisition of the property.”
In both situations, applied to this case, Brigido gets
nothing. The court cited cases, as well as the situation in other states, to
justify that homemaking services may be a consideration in the
WHEREFORE, the Decision dated October 10, 2005 of the Regional distribution of assets, while rejecting the part in Patterson which
Trial Court, Branch 1 of Butuan City is AFFIRMED. Acting on the excludes it.
Motion for Clarification dated July 7, 2006 in the Regional Trial
Court, the Order dated January 8, 2007 of the Regional Trial Court is Homemaking services posted a problem since, to an extent, it is
hereby CLARIFIED in accordance with the above discussions. merely a part of the traditional obligation of the husband to support
his wife upon which the theory of alimony is based, but there has
been an increasing recognition as of late that homemaking services
LA RUE V LA RUE (1983) is no longer viewed as a mere adjunct of the husband’s obligation.

FACTS: In assessing the value of homemaking services, the court said that it
may not depend on a mechanical formula, but that she “has
The parties were married in 1950. The husband exclusively handled contributed to the economic well-being of the family unit through
the financial affairs while the appellant wife worked for 7 years, the performance of the myriad of household and child-rearing
earning $51,000, and then, having been encouraged by the husband, tasks.” The length of the marriage, as well as fault on the part of the
was a homemaker for the rest of the marriage, raising their two wife, is factors in determining its value. Its value must be considered
children and caring for the house. in relation to the net assets at the time of the divorce, and also in
light of the alimony award.
The trial court granted their divorce in March 1980, stating that the
husband’s abusive conduct far outweighed the wife’s. The divorce However, there is still a difference between equitable distribution
order granted her alimony and health allowance but did not provide based on homemaking services and those based on economic
for the distribution of marital assets. contributions, since the former still has some correlation to alimony
and has the characteristic of a judgment. Thus, equitable
She petitioned the Ohio circuit court for: ½ interest of all of distribution based on homemaking services cannot lead to transfers
husband’s personal property. made of legal title to a real estate.
 Undivided ½ interest of all of husband’s real property That the husband was guilty of abusive conduct exonerates the
 Conveyance to her of all real & personal property in the name appellant from fault. As to her contributions, her $51,000 worth of
of and under husband’s control earnings when she worked counts for economic contribution, and
 Reservation for dower interest in real property owned by her homemaking services also entitle her to another equitable
husband. consideration, both counted against the net marital assets. The
home wherein a separate suit was filed is also considered part of the
The court dismissed her petition for failure to prove the existence of
net assets, as well as the joint bank accounts of the parties.
a contract where their marital assets were equally owned, or that
any of her earnings were invested in any of her husband’s LEGAL SEPARATION; EFFECTS OF DECREE; SUPPORT
properties. It did not find any ground to establish constructive trust
for the wife. Before this said petition, she also filed a separate suit AND CUSTODY
Art 213 FC. In case of separation of the parents, parental authority Petition DENIED. There was no grave abuse of discretion. Rosario is
shall be exercised by the parent designated by the Court. The Court unfit by reason of her poverty.
shall take into account all relevant considerations, especially the
choice of the child over seven years of age, unless the parent LEGAL SEPARATION; EFFECTS OF DECREE;
chosen is unfit. (n) INHERITANCE, DONATIONS, AND DESIGNATION IN
MATUTE V MACADAEG INSURANCE

FACTS: SC Rules of Legal Separation Sec 22.

Rosario Matute was found guilty of adultery in an action for legal Petition for revocation of donations. - (a) Within five (5) years from
separation filed by her husband, Armando Medel, on Nov. 6, 1952. the date the decision granting the petition for legal separation has
Armando was awarded the custody of their four children, ages 4, 8, become final, the innocent spouse may file a petition under oath
10 and 12. Armando then left for the US, leaving the care of his the same proceeding for legal separation to revoke the donations
children to his sister in Davao City. Rosario came to live with them so in favor of the offending spouse.
she could be with her children. (b) The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the
Armando came back in 1954, and in Mar 1955 the children joined Register of Deeds of Deeds in the places where the properties are
him in Cebu. With Armando's consent on the condition that they will located.
return in 2 weeks, Rosario brought the children to Manila for her (c) Alienations, liens, and encumbrances registered in good faith.
father's funeral in April 1955. She didn't return. She subsequently before the recording of the petition for revocation in the registries
filed a prayer asking for the court to: of property shall be respected.
 Award her the custody of her children because her children, (d) After the issuance of the Decree of Legal Separation, the
three of whom were already above 10 years old, preferred to innocent spouse may revoke the designation of the offending
be with her and that she was not “unfit to take charge” of them spouse as a beneficiary in any insurance policy even if such
“by reason of moral depravity, habitual drunkenness, incapacity designation be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation or change
or poverty” (in deference to Sec 6, Rule 100, Rules of Court) shall take effect upon written notification thereof to the insurer.
and
 For Armando to pay for support for the children's schooling. LEGAL SEPARATION; EFFECTS OF DECREE; WIFE’S
On June 29, 1955 Judge Macadaeg denied her prayer and ordered SURNAME
her to return the custody of the children to Armando within 24
Art 372 CC. Parental authority terminates:
hours.
(1) Upon the death of the parents or of the child;
She then filed an action for certiorari and prohibition with
(2) Upon emancipation;
preliminary injunction, arguing that Judge Macadaeg had issued the
(3) Upon adoption of the child;
decision with grave abuse of discretion.
(4) Upon the appointment of a general guardian. (167a)
ISSUE/HOLDING:

WON There was grave abuse of discretion or lack of jurisdiction on LAPERAL V REPUBLIC (1962)
the part of the Judge.
Legal Basis: Art. 372. When legal separation has been granted, the
A petition for certiorari and prohibition is a question of whether the wife shall continue using her name and surname employed before
respondent acted "in excess or without jurisdiction" or "with grave the legal separation.
abuse of discretion". There is no question that respondent judge had
FACTS:
jurisdiction. If he had made a mistake, and he did not, then it would
at best only be an "error in judgement" and not an "error in Elisea Santamaria petitioned for the use of her maiden name Elisea
jurisdiction". Laperal after obtaining legal separation from her husband. She also
supported said petition on the fact that she has ceased to live with
Neither did he act with grave abuse of discretion because the June
him for many years.
29, 1955 order merely enforced the award made in the Nov. 6, 1952
which was already final and executory. Unless the Nov. 6, 1952 Prior to the decree of legal separation, she has been using her
decision is reviewed and modified, the award of custody must stand. married name, Elisea Santamaria.
WON Rosario Matute is fit to be awarded custody of her children The lower court used Rule 103 of the Rules of Court, Change of
pursuant to Sec. 6, Rule 100, Rules of Court. Name, and granted the petition. The rationale of the lower court
was that to continue using her married name would give rise to
Children at least 10 years of age may choose their preferred parent
confusion in her finances and the eventual liquidation of the
according to Sec. 6, Rule 100, Rules of Court unless the parent is
conjugal assets
“unfit to take charge” of them “by reason of moral depravity,
habitual drunkenness, incapacity or poverty.” ISSUE: WON the Court may use Rule 103 despite the specific
stipulations in Art. 372 of the Civil Code.
Rosario Matute is without means of livelihood and depends on her
brothers for money and shelter. She is thus unfit by reason of her HOLDING:
poverty.
No. Elisea should retain her married name. She is still married and
there was no severance of the vinculum.
Art. 372 should prevail because it specifically qualified its application b. CC: reconciliation may be in any form, express of tacit.
to married women legally separated from their husbands thus, this Not necessary to have public reestablishment of
applies to Elisea. Even if the Court were to apply Rule 103, it is the common life. Any act of reunion between spouses
opinion of the Supreme Court that it is not a sufficient ground to imply resumption of conjugal life.
justify a change of the name for to hold otherwise would be to c. FC: upon resumption of personal marital relations, it is
provide an easy circumvention of the mandatory provisions of Art. necessary that spouses make joint manifestation
372. signed by both under oath, which be filed with Court in
the proceedings for LS. Approval by court is not
On the lower court’s justification above, the Supreme Court held required.
that it was not sufficiently proven that there will be confusion in her i. Submitted that the fact of resuming common
finances. Secondly, with the issuance of the decree of legal life is essence of reconciliation, and
separation in 1958, the conjugal partnership between petitioner and terminates LS, even if joint manifestation has
her husband had automatically been dissolved and liquidated. not been filed in Court and for purposes of the
future property relations of spouses.
Consequently, there could be no more occasion for an eventual
2. Effects of reconciliation.
liquidation of the conjugal assets.
a. If no decree of LS yet.
**Just in case it will be asked, the previous related case is Dunn v. i. Proceedings are terminated, REGARDLESS of
Palermo- Palermo wants to retain her maiden name even after stage.
marriage. This was allowed by the Court. The legal name of any ii. Parties restored to original situation before
person is the one written in the birth certificate. proceedings were filed. They resume conjugal
life and live together again.
LEGAL SEPARATION; RECONCILIATION; HOW DONE iii. Regain custody and authority over children, if
court has already provided for such to
Art 65 FC. If the spouses should reconcile, a corresponding joint innocent spouse/plaintiff.
manifestation under oath duly signed by them shall be filed with b. If there is already decree of LS.
the court in the same proceeding for legal separation. (n) i. Decree is set aside.
ii. All orders will have no effect.
LEGAL SEPARATION; RECONCILIATION; EFFECTS iii. EXCEPT for property relations of spouses.
1. *FC: ACP or CPG is NOT automatically
Art 66 FC. The reconciliation referred to in the preceding Articles
revived. If dissolution already decreed
shall have the following consequences:
and the forfeiture of net profits
(1) The legal separation proceedings, if still pending, shall thereby pertaining to defendant is in favor of
be terminated at whatever stage; and plaintiff/innocent, regime of
(2) The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside, but the separation of property shall remain.
separation of property and any forfeiture of the share of the guilty 2. *CC: automatic revival upon
spouse already effected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to reconciliation of system of property
revive their former property regime. relations existing before decree of LS.
The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the c. Agreement of Spouses (FC). Spouses may avoid
proper civil registries. (108a) separation of property by executing under oath an
agreement to revive former regime, specifying
Art 67 FC. The agreement to revive the former property regime properties to be contributed anew to the restored
referred to in the preceding Article shall be executed under oath regime, and properties to be retained as separate
and shall specify: properties.
i. Submitted to Court for approval in the same
(1) The properties to be contributed anew to the restored regime; proceedings for LS.
(2) Those to be retained as separated properties of each spouse; ii. Court is to protect interest of creditors.
and 1. Notices are given to known creditors
(3) The names of all their known creditors, their addresses and the of spouses, so they can be heard
amounts owing to each. before Court approves.
2. Court order to be recorded in proper
The agreement of revival and the motion for its approval shall be
registry of property, which shall not
filed with the court in the same proceeding for legal separation,
prejudice creditors who were not
with copies of both furnished to the creditors named therein. After
notified of the agreement’s hearing.
due hearing, the court shall, in its order, take measure to protect
They can continue to assert their
the interest of creditors and such order shall be recorded in the
claims against properties which are
proper registries of properties.
included in the new community or
The recording of the ordering in the registries of property shall not partnership.
prejudice any creditor not listed or not notified, unless the debtor- d. New Regime. FC authorizes spouses to agree to revive
spouse has sufficient separate properties to satisfy the creditor's former property regime.
claim. (195a, 108a) i. Tolentino: This is not restrictive and does not
limit the spouses to the regime they had
1. Concept of reconciliation. before. They are placed in the position before
a. Reconciliation – VOLUNTARY mutual agreement to live they were married, and may establish an
together again as husband and wife. entirely new regime, as if making a marriage
settlement.
ii. If they do not agree on any system, by law,
their property will be of separation of
property.
3. Subsequent offense. After spouses have reconciled, a new
action for LS can be based ONLY on the subsequent or other
causes, NOT on the causes already pardoned/settled.
a. [past is past, hanap ng bagong excuse para
maghiwalay].
A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC March 4, 2003

RE: PROPOSED RULE ON LEGAL SEPARATION

RESOLUTION

Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for this Court's consideration and
approval the Proposed Rule on Legal Separation, the Court Resolved to APPROVED the same.

The Rule shall take effect on March 15, 2003 following its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than March 7, 2003

March 4, 2003

Davide Jr. C.J., Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Sandoval Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Carpio-Morales, Callejo, Sr.
and Azcuna, JJ.
Ynares-Santiago, on leave,
Corona, officially on leave.

RULE ON LEGAL SEPARATION

Section 1. Scope. - This Rule shall govern petitions for legal separation under the Family Code of the Philippines.

The Rules of Court shall apply suppletorily.

Section 2. Petition.

(a) Who may and when to file. - (1) A petition for legal separation may be filed only by the husband or the wife, as the case may be within
five years from the time of the occurrence of any of the following causes:
(a) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;
(b) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation;
(c) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or
connivance in such corruption or inducement;
(d) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned;
(e) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;
(f) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
(g) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in or outside the Philippines;
(h) Sexual infidelity or perversion of the respondent;
(i) Attempt on the life of petitioner by the respondent; or
(j) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.

(b) Contents and form. - The petition for legal separation shall:

(1) Allege the complete facts constituting the cause of action


(2) State the names and ages of the common children of the parties, specify the regime governing their property relations, the properties
involved, and creditors, if any. If there is no adequate provision in a written agreement between the parties, the petitioner may apply for
a provisional order for spousal support, custody and support of common children, visitation rights, administration of community or
conjugal property, and other similar matters requiring urgent action,
(3) Be verified and accompanied by a certification against forum shopping. The verification and certification must be personally signed by
the petitioner. No petition may be filed solely by counsel or through an attorney-in-fact. If the petitioner is in a foreign country, the
verification and certification against forum shopping shall be authenticated by the duly authorized officer of the Philippine embassy or
legation, consul general, consul or vice-consul or consular agent in said country
(4) Be filed in six copies. The petitioner shall, within five days from such filing, furnish a copy of the petition to the City or Provincial
Prosecutor and the creditors, if any, and submit to the court proof of such service within the same period.

Failure to comply with the preceding requirements may be a ground for immediate dismissal of the petition.

(c) Venue. - The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at
least six months prior to the date of filing "or in The case of a non-resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the election of
the petitioner.

Section 3. Summons. - The service of summons shall be governed by Rule 14 of the Rules of Court and by the following rules:

(a) Where the respondent cannot be located at his given address or his whereabouts are unknown and cannot be ascertained by diligent
inquiry, service of summons may, by leave of court, be effected upon him by publication once a week for two consecutive weeks in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines and in such place as the court may order. In addition, a copy of the summons shall be
served on respondent at his last known address by registered mail or by any other means the court may deem sufficient.

(b) The summons to be published shall be contained in an order of the court with the following data; (1) title of the case; (2) docket
number; (3) nature of the petition; (4) principal grounds of the petition and the reliefs prayed for, and (5) a directive for respondent to
answer within thirty days from the last issue of publication.

Section 4. Motion to Dismiss. - No motion to dismiss the petition shall be allowed except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter or over the parties; provided, however, that any other ground that might warrant a dismissal of the case may be raised as an affirmative
defense in an answer.

Section 5. Answer.

(a) The respondent shall file his answer within fifteen days from receipt of summons, or within thirty days from the last issue of
publication in case of service of summons by publication. The answer must be verified by respondent himself and not by counsel or
attorney-in-fact.
(b) If the respondent fails to file an answer, the court shall not declare him in default.
(c) Where no answer is filed/or if the answer does not tender an issue the court shall order the public prosecutor to investigate whether
collusion exists between the parties.

Section 6. Investigation Report of Public Prosecutor.

(a) Within one one month after receipt of the court order mentioned in paragraph (c) of the preceeding section, the public prosecutor
shall submit a report to the court on whether the parties are in collusion and serve copies on the parties and their respective counsels, if
any.
(b) If the public prosecutor finds that collusion exists, he shall state the basis thereof in his report. The parties shall file their respective
comments on the finding of collusion within ten days from receipt of copy of the report. The court shall set the report for hearing and if
convinced that parties are in collusion,-it shall dismiss the petition.
(c) If the public prosecutor reports that no collusion exists, the court shall set the case for pre-trial. It shall be the duty of the public
prosecutor to appear for the State at the pre-trial.

Section 7. Social Worker. - The court may require a social worker to conduct a case study and to submit the corresponding report at least three
days before the pre-trial. The court may also require a case study at any stage of the case whenever necessary,

Section 8. Pre-trial. -

(a) Pre-trial mandatory.-A pre-trial is mandatory. On motion or motu proprio, the court shall set the pre-trial after the last pleading has
been served and filed, or upon receipt of the report of the public prosecutor that no collusion exists between the parties on a date not
earlier than six months from date of the filing of the petition.
(b) Notice of Pre-trial.
(1) The notice of pre-trial shall contain:
(a) the date of pre-trial conference; and
(b) an order directing the parties to file and serve their respective pre-trial briefs in such manner as shall ensure the
receipt thereof by the adverse party at least three days before the date of pre-trial.
(2) The notice shall be served separately on the parties and their respective counsels as well as on the public prosecutor. It shall
be their duty to appear personally at the pre-trial.
(3) Notice of pre-trial shall be sent to the respondent even if he fails to file an answer. In case of summons by publication and
the respondent failed to file his answer, notice of pre-trial shall be sent to respondent at his last known address.

Section 9. Contents of pre-trial brief. - The pre-trial brief shall contain the following:

(1) A statement of the willingness of the parties to enter into agreements as may be allowed by law, indicating the desired terms thereof;
(2) A concise statement of their respective claims together with the applicable laws and authorities;
(3) Admitted facts and proposed stipulations of facts, as well as the disputed factual and legal issues;
(4) All the evidence to be presented, including expert opinion, if any, briefly stating or describing the nature and purpose thereof;
(5) The number and names of the witnesses and their respective affidavits; and
(6) Such other matters as the court may require.

Failure to file the pre-trial brief or to comply with its required contents shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial under
the succeeding section.

Section 10. Effect of failure to appear at the pre-trial.


(1) If the petitioner fails to appear personally, the case shall be dismissed unless his counsel or a duly authorized representative appears
in court and proves a valid excuse for the non-appearance of the petitioner.
(2) If the respondent filed his answer but fails to appear, the court shall proceed with the pre-trial and require the public prosecutor to
investigate the non-appearance of the respondent and submit within fifteen days a report to the court stating whether his non-
appearance is due to any collusion between the parties/ If there is no collusion the court shall require the public prosecutor to intervene
for the State during the trial on the.merits to prevent suppression or fabrication of evidence.

Section 11. Pre-trial conference. - At the pre-trial conference, the court may refer the issues to a mediator who shall assist the parties in reaching
an agreement on matters not prohibited by law.

The mediator shall render a report within one month from referral which, for good reasons, the court may extend for a period not exceeding
one month.

In case mediation is not availed of or where it fails, the court shall proceed with the pre-trial conference, on which occasion it shall consider
the advisability of receiving expert testimony and such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the petition.

Section 12. Pre-trial order.

(a) The proceedings in the pre-trial shall be recorded. Upon termination of the pre-trial, the court shall issue a pre-trial order which shall
recite in detail the matters taken up in the conference, the action taken thereon, the amendments allowed on the pleadings, and, except
as to the ground of legal separation, the agreements or admissions made by the parties on any of the matters considered, including any
provisional order that may be necessary or agreed upon by the parties.
(b) Should the action proceed to trial, the order shall contain a recital of the following:

(1) Facts undisputed, admitted, and those which need not be proved subject to Section 13 of this Rule;
(2) Factual and legal issues to be litigated;
(3) Evidence, including objects and documents, that have been marked and will be presented;
(4) Names of witnesses who will be presented and their testimonies in the form of affidavits; and
(5) Schedule of the presentation of evidence.

The pre-trial order shall also contain a directive to the public prosecutor to appear for the State and take steps to prevent collusion between
the parties at any stage of the proceedings and fabrication or suppression of evidence during the trial on the merits.

(c) The parties shall not be allowed to raise issues or present witnesses and evidence other than those stated in the pre-trial order. The order shall
control the trial of the case unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice.

(d) The parties shall have five days from receipt of the pre-trial order to propose corrections or modifications.

Section 13. Prohibited compromise. - The court shall not allow compromise on prohibited matters, such as the following:

(1) The civil status of persons;

(2) The validity of a marriage or of a legal separation;

(3) Any ground lor legal separation;

(4) Future support;

(5) The jurisdiction of courts; and

(6) Future legitime.

Section 14. Trial. - (a) The presiding judge shall personally conduct the trial of the case. No delegation of the reception of evidence to a
commissioner shall be allowed except as to matters involving property relations of the spouses.

(b) The grounds for legal separation must be proved. No judgment on the pleadings, summary judgment, or confession of judgment shall be
allowed.

(c) The court may order the exclusion from the courtroom of all persons, including members of the press, who do not have a direct interest in the
case. Such an order may be made if the court determines on the record othat requiring a party to testify in open court would not enhance the
ascertainment of truth; would cause to the party psychological harm or inability to effectively communicate due to embarrassment, fear, or
timidity; would violate the party's right to privacy; or would be offensive to decency

(d) No copy shall be taken nor any examination or perusal of the records of the case or parts thereof be made by any person other than a party or
counsel of a party, except by order of the court.
Section 15. Memoranda. - The court may require the parties and the public prosecutor to file their respective memoranda in support of their claims
within fifteen days from the date the trial is terminated. No other pleadings or papers may be submitted without leave of court. After the lapse of
the period herein provided, the case will be considered submitted for decision, with or without the memoranda.

Section 16. Decision. - (a) The court shall deny the petition on any of the following grounds:

(1) The aggrieved party has condoned the offense or act complained of or has consented to the commission of the offense or act complained of;

(2) There is connivance in the commission of the offense-or act constituting the ground for legal separation;

(3) Both parties have given ground for legal separation;

(4) There is collusion between the parties to obtain the decree of legal separation; or

(5) The action is barred by prescription.

(b) If the court renders a decision granting the petition, it shall declare therein that the Decree of Legal Separation shall be issued by the court only
after full compliance with liquidation under the Family Code.

However, in the absence of any property of.the parties, the court shall forthwith issue a Decree of Legal Separation which shall be registered
in the Civil Registry where the marriage was recorded and in the Civil Registry where the Family Court granting the legal separation is located.

(c) The decision shall likewise declare that:

(1) The spouses are entitled to live separately from each other but the marriage bond is not severed;

(2) The obligation of mutual support between the spouses ceases; and

(3) The offending spouse is disqualified from inheriting from the innocent spouse by intestate succession, and provisions in favor of the offending
spouse made in the will of the innocent spouse are revoked by operation of law.

(d) The parties, including the Solicitor General and the public prosecutor, shall be served with copies of the decision personally or by
registered mail. If the respondent summoned by publication failed to appear in the action, the dispositive part of the decision shall also be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation.

Section 17. Appeal. -

(a) Pre-condition. - No appeal from the decision shall be allowed unless the appellant has filed a motion for reconsideration or new trial within
fifteen days from notice of judgment.

(b) Notice of Appeal - An aggrieved party or the Solicitor General may appeal from the decision by filing a Notice of Appeal within fifteen days from
notice of denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial. The appellant shall serve a copy of the notice of appeal upon the adverse parties.

Section 18. Liquidation, partition and distribution, custody, and support of minor children. - Upon entry of the judgment granting the petition, or, in
case of appeal, upon receipt of the entry of judgment of the appellate court granting the petition, the Family Court, on motion of either party, shall
proceed with the liquidation, partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses, including custody and support of common children, under
the Family Code unless such matters had been adjudicated in previous judicial proceedings.

Section 19. Issuance of Decree of Legal Separation. - (a) The court shall issue the Decree of Legal Separation after:

(1) registration of the entry of judgment granting the petition tor legal separation in the Civil Registry where the marriage was celebrated and in the
Civil Registry where the Family Court is located; and

(2) registration of the approved partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses, in the proper Register of Deeds where the real
properties are located.

(b) The court shall quote in the Decree the dispositive portion of the judgment entered and attach to the Decree the approved deed of partition.

Section 20. Registration and publication of the Decree of Legal Separation; decree as best evidence. -

(a) Registration of decree.-The prevailing party shall cause the registration of the Decree in the Civil Registry where the marriage was registered, in
the Civil Registry of the place where the Family Court is situated, and in the National Census and Statistics Office. He shall report to the court
compliance with this requirement within thirty days iron receipt of the copy of the Decree.
(b) Publication of decree.-- In case service of summons was made by publication, the parties shall cause the publication of the Decree once in a
newspaper of general circulation.

(c) Best evidence.-The registered Decree shall be the best evidence to prove the legal separation of the parties and shall serve as notice to
third persons concerning the properties of petitioner and respondent.

Section 21. Effect of death of a party; duty of the Family Court or Appellate Court. - (a) In case a party dies at any stage of me proceedings before
the entry of judgment, the court shall order the case closed and terminated without prejudice to the settlement of estate proper proceedings in
the regular courts.

(b) If the party dies after the entry of judgment, the same shall be binding upon the parties and their successors in interest in the settlement of the
estate in the regular courts.

Section 22. Petition for revocation of donations. - (a) Within five (5) years from the date the decision granting the petition for legal separation has
become final, the innocent spouse may file a petition under oath the same proceeding for legal separation to revoke the donations in favor of the
offending spouse.

(b)The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the Register of Deeds of Deeds in the places where the properties are located.

(c)Alienations, liens, and encumbrances registered in good faith. before the recording of the petition for revocation in the registries of property
shall be respected.

(d)After the issuance of the Decree of Legal Separation, the innocent spouse may revoke the designation of the offending spouse as a beneficiary in
any insurance policy even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation or change shall take effect upon written notification
thereof to the insurer.

Section 23. Decree of Reconciliation. - (a) If the spouses had reconciled, a joint manifestation under oath, duly signed by the spouses, may be filed
in the same proceeding for legal separation.

(b) If the reconciliation occurred while the proceeding for legal separation is pending, the court shall immediately issue an order terminating the
proceeding.

(c) If the reconciliation occurred after the rendition of the judgment granting the petition for legal separation but before the issuance of the
Decree, the spouses shall express in their manifestation whether or not they agree to revive the former regime of their property relations or
choose a new regime.

The court shall immediately issue a Decree of Reconciliation declaring that the legal separation proceeding is set aside and specifying the
regime of property relations under which the spouses shall be covered.

(d) If the spouses reconciled after the issuance of the Decree, the court, upon proper motion, shall issue a decree of reconciliation declaring therein
that the Decree is set aside but the separation of property and any forfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already effected subsists, unless the
spouses have agreed to revive their former regime of property relations or adopt a new regime.

(e) In case of paragraphs (b), (c), and (d). if the reconciled spouses choose to adopt a regime of property relations different from that which they
had prior to the filing of the petition for legal separation, the spouses shall comply with Section 24 hereof.

(f) The decree of reconciliation shall be recorded in the Civil Registries where the marriage and the Decree had been registered.

Section 24. Revival of property regime or adoption of another. -

(a) In case of reconciliation under Section 23, paragraph (c) above, the parties shall file a verified motion for revival of regime of property relations
or the adoption of another regime of property relations in the same proceeding for legal separation attaching to said motion their agreement for
the approval of the court.

(b) The agreement which shall be verified shall specify the following:

(1) The properties to be contributed to the restored or new regime;

(2) Those to be retained as separate properties of each spouse; and

(3) The names of all their known creditors, their addresses, and the amounts owing to each.

(c) The creditors shall be furnished with copies of the motion and the agreement.
(d) The court shall require the spouses to cause the publication of their verified motion for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation.

(e) After due hearing, and the court decides to grant the motion, it shall issue an order directing the parties to record the order in the proper
registries of property within thirty days from receipt of a copy of the order and submit proof of compliance within the same period.

Section 25. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on March 15,2003 following its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than
March 7, 2003.